It appears that many right-wing Republicans are dead serious this time about defunding Obamacare. Utah Senator Mike Lee is circulating a letter among his colleagues that would threaten a government shut-down unless all funding for Obamacare is removed from the continuing resolution that must be passed by September 30.

If Republicans in both houses simply refuse to vote for any continuing resolution that contains further funding for further enforcement of Obamacare, we can stop it. We can stop the individual mandate from going into effect.

Signers of the letter include the No. 2 and No. 3 Republican senators, John Cornyn of Texas and John Thune of South Dakota, as well as Marco Rubio, who is desperately trying to get back in the good graces of the GOP base after the immigration-reform fiasco.

In the House, it’s North Carolina Representative Mark Meadows who is spearheading the defunding effort:

We have 64 of my colleagues on this letter and we’re asking the leadership not to bring anything to the floor that has funding for ObamaCare in it.

Can it be done? Perhaps a more pertinent question is, should it be done?

Why is it the position of so many on the right that blowing up the government will accomplish something? It doesn’t cut spending nearly enough. It doesn’t shrink government. It only gives the opposition the chance to demagogue against the irresponsibility inherent in putting so many who are dependent on government at risk. It’s a needless irritant that causes voters to question the seriousness of Republicans when it comes to governance.

In short, it’s crazy. And doing it in order to defund Obamacare is a fool’s errand.

The right wing doesn’t like to hear it, but the Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. It can’t be repealed as long as Obama sits in the White House and Democrats control the Senate (or nearly so). The law is very unpopular, but not overwhelmingly so. The latest Fox News poll shows a 53-40 split for repeal, with most other polls showing a plurality in favor of getting rid of it. There is no great public drumbeat for repeal.

That may change once the full, detrimental effects of Obamacare are felt by individuals and businesses, and when it becomes apparent what a drag the law is going to be on the economy. But Obamacare is always going to have its supporters too, as Byron York points out:

On the other hand, a lot of thoughtful conservatives are looking beyond Oct. 1 to Jan. 1, the day the law (except for the parts the president has unilaterally postponed) is scheduled to go fully into effect. On that day the government will begin subsidizing health insurance for millions of Americans. (A family of four with income as high as $88,000 will be eligible for subsidies.) When people begin receiving that entitlement, the dynamics of the Obamacare debate will change.

At that point, the Republican mantra of total repeal will become obsolete. The administration will mount a huge public relations campaign to highlight individuals who have received government assistance to help them afford, say, chemotherapy, or dialysis, or some other life-saving treatment. Will Republicans advocate cutting off the funds that help pay for such care?

Unlike you, Rick, I can't think of a more productive move for the good of the nation than to shut the government down for the next two years if that's what it takes to stop Obamacare. You acknowledge it is a disaster and will ruin the best healthcare system in the world, but you're not willing to fight to stop it. Typical RINO. How's that go along to get along mentality working out for the Republicans these days, Rick? Not very well I would contend. The American people are hungry for someone who will do the right thing regardless of the consequences, and that's what this defunding of Obamacare would do. Why don't you join us and advocate doing the right thing instead of kicking against the goads?

"The right wing doesn’t like to hear it, but the Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. It can’t be repealed as long as Obama sits in the White House and Democrats control the Senate (or nearly so)."

If it's the law of the land, what law authorizes the President to delay its implementation?

I actually agree that cutting off funding is the worse possible alternative politically, but if you're going to pose yourself as counsel and critic, then it is time you fulfill the counsel part and step up to provide an alternative path. And I've noticed you never do that. Frankly, I find that pretty empty rhetoric and not terribly impressive.

I am left to conclude you believe the best path for Republicans and the public at large is more hand wringing about Obamacare and biting the proverbial s___ sandwich when implemented.

So tell me. What does your solution of bowing out and agreeing to the law of the land get us besides inadequate healthcare and a bankrupt system enforced by the Gestapo, formerly known as the IRS?

Obama's plan all along has been single payer. You aren't really naive enough to believe it was Obama's intent to leave Obamacare as is, do you?

You all might not want to hear this, but do you really think that the CEO's of GlaxoSmithKline, HoffmannLaRoche, Cigna, United Health, are reading PJMedia, or even caring about all this nattering and scheming and dreaming y'all are doing about the revival of some grand Pre-Industrial Constitutional Confederacy? I have to admit it's entertaining to watch you whip yourselves into a lather. But (aw heck, I don't know what to tell you).

I don't know how many are like me but the Repubs are on probation with me. If they don't kill Obamacare in any way possible, NHS here we come because the Dems got a half a loaf and the full loaf is their goal- single payer. Dems know what they want- Repubs wring their hands. Me? I'll just sit on mine- they won't deserve my vote.

It's the law of the land. It was approved. A lot of people think it will be great. You know, looking through history I see lots of other laws and policies that are now thought contemptible or even a few that are banned by treaties. Being made a law doesn't make wrong good.

BTW, it is commendable that you listen to our congressmen and senators so closely—you repeated what a few of them said yesterday almost word for word.

It's certainly easier to defund and kill a bad law before it's implemented than sometime in the future when everyone is dependent or entwined in its nonsense. I say move ahead, fight it, don't stop, don't capitulate "because it's the law of the land." It's own senate democrat sponsor called it a "train wreck."

I'm not sure I would miss the government should it shut down for awhile. Essential services still get funded and they are about all we really need anyway. My family won't let anyone go hungry should the checks stop coming. My grandparents fed a lot of people through the depression with the little they had, it can be done again.

Yeah, that's cool, put the military on hiatus for a couple years. I'm sure that among the million or so active duty and civilian employees there are a few that can get along without paychecks for a while. I'm sure their landlords will cut them some slack, along with the phone company, the electric, gas, etc. After all, your grandparents did it.

We've reached the point where we really can't count on our elected 'so called representatives' to do what is right and constitutional. I think we may need a real tea party event - perhaps the computer files/softwares being used to run Obamacare could be 'deleted' or 'hacked' - accidentally of course.

I was thinking that if Obama won't sign any spending legislation sent to him, that finally we've found a way to make real, meaningful cuts in federal spending—not just cutting margins and rates of expansion and all the other faux cuts politicians brag about. Eventually someone will compromise or we can quit playing games and draw guns, either way the masks would come off.

I couldn't get through it either. My head started pounded after a couple paragraphs in. Moran's message is always the same: be nice, listen to *reason* as to why we need to set aside our beliefs and concerns, and accept the fact that we will not and cannot get what we want. Just roll over.

I was wondering at his argument that this tactic would make the Republicans look bad—how can they look worse than the spineless cowards they have been? It may be stupid bravado, but at least they would be standing for something for a change.

Thank you, Chief Justice Roberts. ... I support this move to defund a catastrophic, and still largely unread, "law" that not one single Republican voted in favor of. I stand on the side of the "young firebrands"; and to Hell with the RINOs and statists. This sends a much-needed message to the party base: We hear you.

So our "masters" will have spent $8.8 billion dollars on this abortion by October and since we have spent soooo much up until now why not go full-goose-bozo and throw ANOTHER $5 Trillion dollars at it on the off chance that something good MIGHT come out of it? These crapweasels can waste $8 billion in one morning's "work" (and will do so every. single. day if given the chance). I say house the entire congress and senate in Alcatraz for a year and start over! Maybe the people who wanted to run for high office after that would think twice about what abusing the American people might cost them personally if they persist in their evil ways.